[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George H. W. Bush (1992-1993, Book II)]
[October 23, 1992]
[Pages 1941-1942]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]



Statement on Signing the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 1993
October 23, 1992

    Today I am signing into law H.R. 5006, the ``National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993.'' H.R. 5006 authorizes 
appropriations that provide for a national defense adequate to meet 
foreseeable threats to the national security. It generally supports the 
Administration's major defense priorities, including key elements of the 
Strategic Defense Initiative and the B-2 program. I am also pleased that 
the bill includes the Cuban Democracy Act, which will help establish a 
free and democratic Cuba.
    I have signed this Act notwithstanding the reservations that I have 
regarding certain of its provisions. I am particularly concerned about 
provisions that purport to derogate the President's authority under the 
Constitution to conduct U.S. foreign policy, including negotiations with 
other countries. A number of provisions purport to establish foreign 
policy by providing that it shall be ``the policy of the United States'' 
or ``the goal of the United States'' to undertake specific diplomatic 
initiatives. Consistent with my responsibility under the Constitution 
for the conduct of diplomatic negotiations, and with established 
practice, I will construe these provisions to be precatory rather than 
mandatory. Other provisions purport to require reports to the Congress 
concerning diplomatic negotiations. I sign this bill with the 
understanding that these provisions do not detract from my 
constitutional authority to protect sensitive national security 
information.
    In addition, H.R. 5006 would assign new domestic, civil functions of 
government to the Department of Defense and the Armed Forces. These 
roles include community medical care; local school funding; training of 
civilian children; establishing new government data bases on U.S. 
defense businesses; establishing plans for U.S. industries; assisting 
and funding Federal, State, local, and private nonprofit industrial 
support efforts; and providing broad adjustment grants to communities. 
For the most part, the objectives of these provisions are laudable. The 
functions prescribed are not, however, appropriate roles for the 
military. Accordingly, I direct the Secretary of Defense to implement 
these provisions in a manner that will do the least damage possible to 
the traditional role of the military. Where particular provisions of 
H.R. 5006 cannot be implemented consistent with the traditional role of 
the military, I direct the Secretary of Defense to draft and propose to 
the Congress remedial legislation.
    I am also concerned that two provisions of H.R. 5006 might be 
construed to impinge on the President's authority as Commander in Chief 
and as head of the executive branch. Section 1303 purports to prohibit 
the use of appropriations to support a level of U.S. troops in Europe 
greater than 100,000 after October 1, 1995, and section 1302 purports to 
require a 40 percent cut in U.S. forces overseas after September 30, 
1996, absent a war or national emergency. American forces abroad are a 
stabilizing influence in a volatile world and provide a ready means to 
protect American interests. Ill-considered cuts to America's forward 
presence diminish America's ability to help

[[Page 1942]]

keep the peace in the future in various regions of the world. I shall 
construe these provisions consistent with my authority to deploy 
military personnel as necessary to fulfill my constitutional 
responsibilities.
    I note with disappointment that included within this bill is a 
provision that will lessen the impact of the honoraria restriction on a 
very select group of individuals rather than the career work force as a 
whole. I have strongly supported a Governmentwide amendment, and I 
believe that passage of this limited exemption sends a message that 
Federal employees need not be accorded the respect and fair treatment 
they deserve. As a result, the credibility of all of the standards to 
which we ask employees to adhere is undermined.
    I also note that section 330, under which the Secretary of Defense 
may ``settle or defend'' certain claims, should not be understood to 
detract from the Attorney General's plenary litigating authority. 
Accordingly, to the extent provided in current law, the Secretary of 
Defense will ``settle or defend'' claims in litigation through attorneys 
provided by the Department of Justice.
    Section 4217 provides overbroad authority to the Government to 
collect data on technology and the industrial base from American 
businesses. Collecting such data through subpoena, administrative search 
warrants, and other investigative techniques authorized by this section 
will not contribute to America's economic strength and could intrude 
unacceptably into the lives of those who own and work in the Nation's 
businesses. Accordingly, I do not anticipate that the authority provided 
by section 4217 will be exercised.
    As for title XVI, which prohibits exports of certain goods or 
technologies listed on the Department of Commerce Control List, I will 
interpret this provision as applying solely to items listed as requiring 
a validated license for export to Iran or Iraq. I find no indication of 
intent to override the congressionally endorsed regulatory provisions 
regarding exports from abroad of foreign-made products that incorporate 
certain minimal U.S.-origin content. As to the contract sanctity 
provision, I consider the reference date to be the date of enactment of 
this law. The Secretary of Commerce shall promptly issue such 
interpretive guidance and implementing regulations as may be required.
    Finally, the bill contains a number of provisions for the 
disposition of Federal real property interests that would circumvent the 
provisions of, or regulations related to, the Federal Property and 
Administrative Services Act of 1949. Effective and efficient management 
of such real property matters generally is best accomplished in 
accordance with the Property Act.

                                                             George Bush

The White House,
October 23, 1992.

                    Note: H.R. 5006, approved October 23, was assigned 
                        Public Law No. 102-484.